Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Drug testing benefits claimants?

98 replies

LuisSuarezTeeth · 09/03/2016 13:21

I've just been reading the opinions on another forum about testing benefits claimants for illegal substances. The suggestion is that ALL taxpayer funded benefits, including DLA, PIP, Tax credits and so on, should be subject to urine sample testing.

I can't believe the amount of support for it.

AIBU to find the prospect chilling?

OP posts:
Original poster
LuisSuarezTeeth · 09/03/2016 13:59

Sorry it's a fail link - it has been considered before...

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2645001/Government-considers-enforcing-drug-testing-dole-recipients-major-welfare-overhaul.html

OP posts:
Original poster
LuisSuarezTeeth · 09/03/2016 14:00

Sorry that was the wrong link

OP posts:
LurkingHusband · 09/03/2016 14:01

There was a spook article a few weeks back - it may have been the Daily Mash. It was titled "How to talk to your kids about drugs".

For me, the killer line (because it's so true) was "don't forget, encourage your kids to get used to the legal drugs of tobacco and alcohol, before suggesting they move onto illegal ones".

People don't like hearing tobacconists and pubs called drug dealers. But that's what they are, if your definition of a drug is "any substance ingested to affect the mood". (And chocolate with it's theobromides is also in there).

LurkingHusband · 09/03/2016 14:01

spook ? Spoof ffs.

PerryHatter · 09/03/2016 14:03

22 people out of 8001 tested positive/refused the test. Well...that proved nothing.

HelenaDove · 09/03/2016 14:04

Ive signed on in the past.

Im in my forties and have never even been drunk.....not once. I wonder how many people on that other forum can say that.

Ive never touched drugs.

OzzieFem · 09/03/2016 14:04

Pretty stupid idea as a lot of our fly in, fly out workers have been found to using other people urine to pass tests.

Original poster
LuisSuarezTeeth · 09/03/2016 14:04

This is the bill proposed by the DWP in 2009

www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmbills/008/en/09008x-d.htm#index_link_53

OP posts:
LurkingHusband · 09/03/2016 14:12

Im in my forties and have never even been drunk.....not once. I wonder how many people on that other forum can say that.

Probably more than GAF about it.

Ive never touched drugs.

Oh yes you have. Unless your definition of "drugs" excludes all medicines. Of course what you wanted to say (but clarity of thought can be a real pain at times) is you have never touched illegal drugs. Which may, or may not ne true, but is, for the main, irrelevant. Especially when the biggest harms to society come from (wait for it) alcohol and tobacco. Which you were quite happy to accept the tax from when you were signing on.

Original poster
LuisSuarezTeeth · 09/03/2016 14:17

You mean Helena had her dole paid by alcohol and tobacco tax Lurking? Like, it had an "Origin of Tax" label? Grin

OP posts:
cocochanel21 · 09/03/2016 14:30

That a joke

My dd had a drug problem for years

She wouldn't have cared if her benefits were stopped

Better to look at the government's methadone program

She was on methadone for bloody years. FREE OF CHARGE

UnmentionedElephantDildo · 09/03/2016 14:31

2009?

So a Labour initiative?

LurkingHusband · 09/03/2016 14:31

You mean Helena had her dole paid by alcohol and tobacco tax Lurking?

Precisely. Meanwhile, MrsLHs DLA/ESA are paid for by paedophiles and prostitutes Shock.

TheRegularShow · 09/03/2016 14:36

Wouldn't it cost more to test every benefit claimant for drugs than the money it would save cutting their benefits if found positive?

HelenaDove · 09/03/2016 14:38

I did used to smoke but gave up 11 years ago.

Eeyore86 · 09/03/2016 14:43

Well I receive PIP and I'd fail a drugs test! I'm prescribed opiate medications from my GP and hospital team so there would have to be a prescribed medication get out clause for it however in theory as I'd be testing positive for opiates due to a legitimate reason I could then take other opiates on top without any fear as urine screens don't deferentiate just give a simple positive

Oral swobs could be used as they can give much more specific results however also much more expensive and need to be sent away to a lab for testing

I work within substance misuse (hence how I know about testing) and this would be a disaster mainly due to the prescribed drug issue as so many medications would give positive results I think it would be a complete and utter waste of time to even consider introducing it

LurkingHusband · 09/03/2016 14:46

Wouldn't it cost more to test every benefit claimant for drugs than the money it would save cutting their benefits if found positive?

Depends what the point is. If it's to save money, then yes.

However, as the benefit changes have proved, it's not about saving money, but about enforcing Tory morality. Which is that the working classes are only there to work, and if they can't work (to paraphrase Oscar Wilde) then what's the point of them ?

The bedroom tax is a paradigm in this respect:

  1. The people it should have targeted (the elderly) are exempt.
  2. It has done nothing to ease the housing shortage (in fact it may have exacerbated it)
  3. It has cost more than it's saved.

So, as a fiscal measure, not really a great success.

However as an ideological oner - peddling the narrative that the poor deserve to be poor - it's a runaway success. And as such being closely examined to see how it can be spread across other areas of benefit spending.

sashh · 09/03/2016 15:00

I did a short work placement at a company that does random drug and alcohol tests - I gave them a list of meds and the ones I thought would be picked up on their testing.

I think a lot can be said about the way a positive test is treated. Eg at least one coach company has coaches with an 'alcolock', it means a driver has to give a clean breathaliser sample before they can start the engine.

BUT

there are known triggers mouth wash, bonjella, even spraying anti persperant can cause a positive. They have quite a rigorous process for if a test is positive that involves second and third tests on different equipment.

I doubt the DWP would do that.

LurkingHusband · 09/03/2016 15:02

I'd be fucked. I like poppy seeds.

BreakingDad77 · 09/03/2016 15:21

This is sadly UK 2016, obsessed with benefits and immigrants, conservatives got in with a majority so guess lots of people think its awesome to have all our services cut back.

This is why I fear a Brexit lol as the UK left to its own devices will have poor houses back up and running.

MadamDeathstare · 09/03/2016 15:27

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

MrsTerryPratchett · 09/03/2016 15:28

I think it's a wonderful idea. Urine test claimants voluntarily then offer the ones who test positive; drug counselling, places in residential rehabs for free, family counselling and clean, safe housing for their recovery. Great! Oh, that's not what the idea is, is it?

JoffreyBaratheon · 09/03/2016 15:32

If they gave it to their golf club mates ATOS or Capita, it would be a farce anyway.

LurkingHusband · 09/03/2016 15:33

I think they got about $800 back in welfare and spent $54,000 in testing.

So, $53,200 to pump an ideological message ? Bargain ! Anyway it's hardly wasted money is it ? All those drug tests administered by companies owned by the politicians ?

icanteven · 09/03/2016 15:35

MrsTerryPratchett - I was actually thinking something similar. They'd get some fantastic data for where in the country needed better addiction support etc.